THE College Football Playoff Rankings Thread [MICH,WASH,TEX,ALA]

[MuellerHorn 4185]

Man, this place is a beating. Forget permutations and construed biases.

Root like hell for Iowa (not happening) and Louisville. Either of those two teams winning represent are our chance at making the CFP.

Pac-12 champ is in. SEC champ is in. Texas needs UM or FSU to lose. It's simple.

[Redneck Mutha 7935]

1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

Sad shit but OU was never left out with one loss and their one loss was always worse and their best win was never as good as at Bama.  /SwitzerSmiling

[Dahobbs 17420]

6 minutes ago, ChickenNuggets said:

Can someone please explain to me why y'all insist it's good for Alabama to beat Georgia?

Simple game theory. 

Texas is in if FSU or Michigan lose. Either scenario means at most 4, 1 loss or better P5 conference champions. The committee has made very clear over the last decade that the order of analysis is overall record followed by conference champion. Basically, conference champion is used as a tie breaker among teams with the same record. 

if neither FSU or Michigan lose, we need another pathway. Based on the rule above, we aren't getting in over Washington if it wins. And we aren't getting in over Georgia if it wins. We have a chance if either Alabama or Oregon wins. And we have an even better chance if both win. Further, there is no reason to root for either Washington or Georgia since neither winning benefits us. 

[Hondo 661]

15 minutes ago, Alien Octopus said:

I'd eat a pile of white crusted over dog shit if Alabama pulled out a squeeker over Georgia and got in over us if we handle our business vs OSU.

 

15 minutes ago, Alien Octopus said:

With or without utensils? 

[billfromlaketravis 11357]

So the CFB drops Ohio State 4 spots for a “competitive loss” to Michigan on the road. 
 

How many would Michigan drop if Iowa beats them 9-7? 

[ChickenNuggets 1610]

Edit - deleted... 

Edited November 29, 2023 by ChickenNuggets

[Hank_Hill 18484]

8 minutes ago, ChickenNuggets said:

You don't see a possibility for the CFP committee to royally fuck us by putting both Georgia AND Bama in the playoffs along with Big10 and Pac12 champs? I sure as hell do... and that only happens with a Bama win. Don't be obtuse... 

 

No. We aren’t getting left out with a conference championship to a conference runner up if FSU loses. Happy to put money on it.

[ChickenNuggets 1610]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Simple game theory. 

Texas is in if FSU or Michigan lose. Either scenario means at most 4, 1 loss or better P5 conference champions. The committee has made very clear over the last decade that the order of analysis is overall record followed by conference champion. Basically, conference champion is used as a tie breaker among teams with the same record. 

if neither FSU or Michigan lose, we need another pathway. Based on the rule above, we aren't getting in over Washington if it wins. And we aren't getting in over Georgia if it wins. We have a chance if either Alabama or Oregon wins. And we have an even better chance if both win. Further, there is no reason to root for either Washington or Georgia since neither winning benefits us. 

I stopped at your second paragraph. there is no other path if FSU wins. that's where your beautiful mind breaks down.

[MuellerHorn 4185]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Simple game theory. 

Texas is in if FSU or Michigan lose. Either scenario means at most 4, 1 loss or better P5 conference champions. The committee has made very clear over the last decade that the order of analysis is overall record followed by conference champion. Basically, conference champion is used as a tie breaker among teams with the same record. 

if neither FSU or Michigan lose, we need another pathway. Based on the rule above, we aren't getting in over Washington if it wins. And we aren't getting in over Georgia if it wins. We have a chance if either Alabama or Oregon wins. And we have an even better chance if both win. Further, there is no reason to root for either Washington or Georgia since neither winning benefits us. 

People keep saying this and it makes no sense. In a scenario in which FSU and Michigan win, we'd need Oregon AND Alabama to win to have any chance. Oregon has consistently been ranked ahead of Texas and their title game win would be much more impressive than ours.

Edited November 29, 2023 by MuellerHorn

[jimmyjazz 45538]

1 minute ago, ChickenNuggets said:

I stopped at your second paragraph. there is no other path if FSU wins. that's where your beautiful mind breaks down.

That's ridiculous.  Practically speaking, you're probably correct, but it's not an impossibility that (for instance) Iowa wins.

[ChickenNuggets 1610]

1 minute ago, Hank_Hill said:

No. We aren’t getting left out with a conference championship to a conference runner up if FSU loses. Happy to put money on it.

Even if that conference runner up is Georgia?

 

[blutow 222]

1 minute ago, ChickenNuggets said:

did you read what I wrote? Oregon will have 2 losses at that point, we will jump them if Washington beats them... there's no way 2 pac 12 teams go into the playoffs. 

The only way your view makes any sense is if you believe that there is a higher probability of a 1 loss non-champ Washington jumping a 1 loss texas champ (basically zero chance) vs.  the probability of 1 loss Texas champ jumping a 1 loss Oregon champ (small, but greater than zero).  Everything is possible with people being involved, but that's a really bad take if that's what you are saying.      

[Hank_Hill 18484]

1 minute ago, ChickenNuggets said:

Even if that conference runner up is Georgia?

 

Anyone 

[UTEE97 3429]

20 minutes ago, Nueces River Rat said:

Doesn’t matter.  The committee will decide the Big10 deserves a spot in the top four.     Kind of like all these years they stuck Norte Dame in there.    It didn’t matter they played a shit schedule, they were Norte Dame and the Big 10 schools like OSU and Michigan are treated the same.   
 

I looked at the bios of the members of this committee.   There isn’t one member on there who looks like they would be an ally for Texas when push comes to shove .   It’s skewed with members who have been involved either through their own education or careers in PAC 12, ACC and Big 10 country, particularly Ohio.     Biases matter.   

[wood 11121]

3 hours ago, texastroubadour said:

McElroy is on fire. Joey G is a pussy Buckeye homer 

What did he say? I wasn't able to watch. McElroy seems aight.

[Texas Wahoo 3383]

 

[blutow 222]

2 minutes ago, wood said:

What did he say? I wasn't able to watch. McElroy seems aight.

McElroy was basically making the point that it's never been about picking the best 4 teams and he used Ohio state (in a previous year) as an example.  It was beautiful and Galloway about lost his shit.  Best teams vs. deserving teams has always been a weird balancing act and has never been applied consistently.  FSU will likely make it in because they deserve it, but Oregon is getting a boost because they are perceived as a better team than Texas.  

[Dahobbs 17420]

9 minutes ago, ChickenNuggets said:

I stopped at your second paragraph. there is no other path if FSU wins. that's where your beautiful mind breaks down.

Ok. If you think there is a near zero chance, that's cool. There is still no benefit to either Georgia or Washington winning. So you should still want Oregon and Alabama to win, even if it creates just the slightest of possibilities that Texas advanced. 

[blutow 222]

3 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

There is still no benefit to either Georgia or Washington winning.

It's hard to wrap my head around it, but there are still folks thinking a 1 loss non-champ is a threat to a 1 loss champ.  I don't know how to respond to that line of thinking other than hoping they aren't making the financial decisions for their families.    

[Hagbard Celine 10749]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

Of course, ranking Oregon ahead of all of them is even more preposterous, given the Ducks' lack of résumé, but that problem will take care of itself in the Pac-12 title game.

Ohio State, meanwhile, is just sitting in the clubhouse, waiting for chaos, enjoying its place in the pecking order ahead of Texas and Alabama and certainly well aware that, at this point in the season, no team ranked worse than sixth has made the playoff.

It's certainly possible that, should Bama or Texas add the all-important "conference champion" label to its résumé, the committee will see to adjusting these standings. But it's also possible the committee sees a delicate issue of an Alabama-Texas debate (the Tide are red hot, the Horns hold the head-to-head win) and have decided to take a note from Iowa and punt on the issue altogether, as it did in 2014 when it ignored the thorny Baylor-or-TCU debate in favor of ... Ohio State!

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/38999326/cfp-rankings-anger-index-conference-championship-week-2023

ERMAGHERD!  i guess all of you self-certain folks will just ignore the media mouthpiece most responsible for narrative creation, establishment and nourishment, and why?

because you have successfully written ten thousand words of confirmation bias in this very thread

[billfromlaketravis 11357]

My concern is that the committee has filled in their brackets in with a Sharpie.

Georgia, Michigan, PAC Champion, and SEC Champion. 
 

Georgia has wins over Number 9 Mizzou and Number 11 Ole Miss. Pretty good resume. Plenty of precedent for SEC runner up/second best team to make the CFP. 
 

Bama would have the best win of the year if they beat Georgia, and they’d be the Sec Champs. 

In the committee’s opinion, Michigan has the best current win over Ohio State. I don’t think they’ll lose to Iowa, but I also think it might not matter except for seeding. 
 

I think the committee is praying for Michigan to win, Louisville to win, and especially praying for Georgia to beat Bama to avoid some difficult explanations. 

[Valmy77 13093]

5 minutes ago, blutow said:

It's hard to wrap my head around it, but there are still folks thinking a 1 loss non-champ is a threat to a 1 loss champ.  I don't know how to respond to that line of thinking other than hoping they aren't making the financial decisions for their families.    

And folks are thinking we are going to leap over a 1 loss champ that is ahead of us or they are going to pick us over SEC champ Alabama. That's not happening.

On the other hand Georgia is six spots ahead of us. Washington is four spots ahead of us. I don't know.

But none of this really matters. If FSU losses and we win we should be in. Or Iowa wins (LOL). I would rather not sweat a 1 loss Georgia is all.

Edited November 29, 2023 by Valmy77

[MuellerHorn 4185]

12 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Ok. If you think there is a near zero chance, that's cool. There is still no benefit to either Georgia or Washington winning. So you should still want Oregon and Alabama to win, even if it creates just the slightest of possibilities that Texas advanced. 

My disagreement rests with the Oregon argument. I understand an undefeated UW is a 100% lock over Texas; but how is Oregon, as Pac-12 champion, not a lock over Texas? They've already been ranked ahead of Texas week after week and their title game win would be drastically better than Texas'.

Edited November 29, 2023 by MuellerHorn

[UTEE97 3429]

12 minutes ago, blutow said:

It's hard to wrap my head around it, but there are still folks thinking a 1 loss non-champ is a threat to a 1 loss champ.  I don't know how to respond to that line of thinking other than hoping they aren't making the financial decisions for their families.    

Let me guess you are a financial planner? It's not very hard to understand. The one-loss teams that are above us embolden their resume by having another top tier win at the conference championship. The committee has shown this year that they may not drop an unbeaten team for a close loss against a very good team (see Oregon and OSU). Everything else is conjecture. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by UTEE97

[billfromlaketravis 11357]

15 minutes ago, blutow said:

McElroy was basically making the point that it's never been about picking the best 4 teams and he used Ohio state (in a previous year) as an example.  It was beautiful and Galloway about lost his shit.  Best teams vs. deserving teams has always been a weird balancing act and has never been applied consistently.  FSU will likely make it in because they deserve it, but Oregon is getting a boost because they are perceived as a better team than Texas.  

“Game control” and “eye test” are the reasons Oregon supporters have given for their ranking above Texas. Neither are real things. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by billfromlaketravis

[Sgt Hulk 13642]

Guys with the rankings coming out tonight.  Does anyone know how Texas could get into the top 4?

[Wulaw Horn 18968]

15 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Ok. If you think there is a near zero chance, that's cool. There is still no benefit to either Georgia or Washington winning. So you should still want Oregon and Alabama to win, even if it creates just the slightest of possibilities that Texas advanced. 

There is no benefit to Washington winning in any scenario. There is a benefit to Georgia winning if either Iowa or Louisville wins, because it eliminates the infintesimally small chance the SEC gets in 2 teams (a 12-1 conference champ Alabama and a 12-1 two time defending champ Georgia).  If FSU and and Michigan win then we want a narrow, ugly Bama win over Georgia and a narrow and ugly oregon win over Washington, while we buttfuck OSU and hope that the committee uses the shake up as a chance to judge all the 1 loss teams with a fresh set of eyes (narrators voice- they won't);

[Hermanator 6928]

2 hours ago, 936horn said:

Exactly. No clue why everyone’s all wound up on Oregon. The winner of the PAC title game is in whether it’s Oregon or UW. An FSU loss and MAAAYBE a Bama win are the only scenarios we care about

Because Oregon as winner of PAC 12 with 1 loss shouldn't be in ahead of us as winner of Big 12 with 1 loss. Our resume beats theirs in every conceivable way including common opposition. The committee has made it clear they don't give a fuck about that even though that's supposedly in their rules. 

So if they don't give a fuck about following their own set rules for that then what other rules are they not going to give a fuck about? 

That's why I feel they may try to shoe horn in 2 SEC teams if Alabama edges out Georgia close. 

[ChickenNuggets 1610]

2 minutes ago, Sgt Hulk said:

Guys with the rankings coming out tonight.  Does anyone know how Texas could get into the top 4?

we're fucked until we aren't... 

[Dahobbs 17420]

5 minutes ago, MuellerHorn said:

My disagreement rests with the Oregon argument. I understand an undefeated UW is a 100% lock over Texas; but how is Oregon, as Pac-12 champion, not a lock over Texas? They've already been ranked ahead of Texas week after week and their title game win would be drastically better than Texas'.

Your problem is that you think the current rankings matter. They don't. There is no need for them to be sticky. Alabama beating Georgia changes the quality of that win. We'd be a playoff contending team with a win over a playoff team that is a conference champion. Oregon can easily be jumped in the scenario, especially if the game against Washington is close and we crush Okie State. I agree that it is unlikely that we jump Oregon without an Alabama win. I also don't think it is particularly likely we get in over Alabama. I think the SEC champ is in no matter what. And that's why we want both Alabama and Oregon to win. 

[Valmy77 13093]

6 minutes ago, Sgt Hulk said:

Guys with the rankings coming out tonight.  Does anyone know how Texas could get into the top 4?

We're 7th so that pretty much means that winning the Big 12 title game leaps us past idle Ohio State with our amazing 13th data point. Then FSU has to lose, putting us past them. Then we pass the loser of the PAC 12 title game.

There we are at #4.

[blutow 222]

3 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Let me guess you are a financial planner? It's not very hard to understand. The teams that are above us emboldens their resume by having a top tier win. The committee has shown this year that they may not drop an unbeaten team for a close loss against a very good team (see Oregon and OSU). Everything else is conjecture. 

Um no...  The best case for a non-champ (georgia) has already be laid out well earlier in this thread and it's pretty clear there is no case or precedent that would put them in over a Texas, Oregon, Bama.  With a committee making decisions at their whim, I'm not one of the people saying it's not possible, just that the chance of that happening is much smaller than chance of us benefitting from Bama/Oregon winning.  It's been beat to death, but non-champs with same records as champs have never gotten a spot, even when the champ has a much worse resume (which would not be the case if comparing Texas to Georgia or Washington). 

[markstanco 12501]

Just beat their ass next week in Arlington.

[Hondo 661]

4 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

We're 7th so that pretty much means that winning the Big 12 title game leaps us past idle Ohio State with our amazing 13th data point. Then FSU has to lose, putting us past them. Then we pass the loser of the PAC 12 title game.

There we are at #4.

We're never going to make it to 60+ pages if you summarize it in 4 sentences like that.  You can beef up your posts by calling someone a stupid fuck and/or pointing out that had we wouldn't be having this conversation had we simply beaten OU.

Edited November 29, 2023 by Hondo

[UTEE97 3429]

I feel like the committee is going by the average margin of victory to rank the one-loss teams. It's done in soccer and many other international sports. Can someone check into the average scoring differentials among Oregon, tOSU, Texas and Bama?

[MuellerHorn 4185]

43 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Simple game theory. 

Texas is in if FSU or Michigan lose. Either scenario means at most 4, 1 loss or better P5 conference champions. The committee has made very clear over the last decade that the order of analysis is overall record followed by conference champion. Basically, conference champion is used as a tie breaker among teams with the same record. 

if neither FSU or Michigan lose, we need another pathway. Based on the rule above, we aren't getting in over Washington if it wins. And we aren't getting in over Georgia if it wins. We have a chance if either Alabama or Oregon wins. And we have an even better chance if both win. Further, there is no reason to root for either Washington or Georgia since neither winning benefits us. 

 

40 minutes ago, MuellerHorn said:

People keep saying this and it makes no sense. In a scenario in which FSU and Michigan win, we'd need Oregon AND Alabama to win to have any chance. Oregon has consistently been ranked ahead of Texas and their title game win would be much more impressive than ours.

 

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Your problem is that you think the current rankings matter. They don't. There is no need for them to be sticky. Alabama beating Georgia changes the quality of that win. We'd be a playoff contending team with a win over a playoff team that is a conference champion. Oregon can easily be jumped in the scenario, especially if the game against Washington is close and we crush Okie State. I agree that it is unlikely that we jump Oregon without an Alabama win. I also don't think it is particularly likely we get in over Alabama. I think the SEC champ is in no matter what. And that's why we want both Alabama and Oregon to win. 

Right, we'd need Oregon and Alabama to win. We're saying the same thing. Oregon winning and Bama losing doesn't help us. However, I agree, I think Bama would jump us in that scenario. The SEC champ is making the playoff.

I'm looking for an Iowa or FSU win. If those don't happen, I'm accepting fate.

Edited November 29, 2023 by MuellerHorn

[ChickenNuggets 1610]

2 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

We're 7th so that pretty much means that winning the Big 12 title game leaps us past idle Ohio State with our amazing 13th data point. Then FSU has to lose, putting us past them. Then we pass the loser of the PAC 12 title game.

There we are at #4.

 

[UTEE97 3429]

1 hour ago, blutow said:

Um no...  The best case for a non-champ (georgia) has already be laid out well earlier in this thread and it's pretty clear there is no case or precedent that would put them in over a Texas, Oregon, Bama.  With a committee making decisions at their whim, I'm not one of the people saying it's not possible, just that the chance of that happening is much smaller than chance of us benefitting from Bama/Oregon winning.  It's been beat to death, but non-champs with same records as champs have never gotten a spot, even when the champ has a much worse resume (which would not be the case if comparing Texas to Georgia or Washington). 

I am done arguing with you, dude. Believe what you want. We all want the same thing - Texas to get in.

Edited November 29, 2023 by UTEE97

[Dahobbs 17420]

11 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

There is no benefit to Washington winning in any scenario. There is a benefit to Georgia winning if either Iowa or Louisville wins, because it eliminates the infintesimally small chance the SEC gets in 2 teams (a 12-1 conference champ Alabama and a 12-1 two time defending champ Georgia).  If FSU and and Michigan win then we want a narrow, ugly Bama win over Georgia and a narrow and ugly oregon win over Washington, while we buttfuck OSU and hope that the committee uses the shake up as a chance to judge all the 1 loss teams with a fresh set of eyes (narrators voice- they won't);

Conference champions jump non-conference champions. It always happens. Eliminating the very small chance that it doesn't happen is not worth losing the much larger chance that we can get in over Oregon (and maybe Alabama). 

At any rate, if FSU and Michigan win, I'd think you'd actually want a dominating Alabama win over Georgia if you're actually concerned about anything. Our best win looks even better and will lay to rest any doubt that Georgia should get a second shot. And it will give us even better fodder that if Alabama is in, Texas has to be as well. Oregon gets left out becomes of shit schedule and performance against common opponents. 

Edited November 29, 2023 by Dahobbs

[Hank_Hill 18484]

17 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

Let me guess you are a financial planner? It's not very hard to understand. The one-loss teams that are above us embolden their resume by having another top tier win at the conference championship. The committee has shown this year that they may not drop an unbeaten team for a close loss against a very good team (see Oregon and OSU). Everything else is conjecture. 

Reading is hard

[South Austin 52105]

Based on my reading of the CFP rankings, if Texas wins on Saturday, and Georgia, Michigan, Washington, Florida State, Oregon, and Ohio State all lose, then I think we’re in.

[Dahobbs 17420]

2 minutes ago, MuellerHorn said:

 

 

Right, we'd need Oregon and Alabama to win. We're saying the same thing. Oregon winning doesn't help us. However, I agree, I think Bama would jump us.

I'm looking for a Iowa or FSU win. If those don't happen, I'm accepting fate.

Right. We need both. But either on its own doesn't hurt so there is really no sense in rooting for any other outcome. We want Oregon to win (by a little), Alabama to win, Iowa to win, and Louisville to win. Each of those outcomes, individually and as a whole, increases our odds of being selected. 

[dcar00 14028]

22 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

My concern is that the committee has filled in their brackets in with a Sharpie.

Georgia, Michigan, PAC Champion, and SEC Champion. 
 

Georgia has wins over Number 9 Mizzou and Number 11 Ole Miss. Pretty good resume. Plenty of precedent for SEC runner up/second best team to make the CFP. 
 

Bama would have the best win of the year if they beat Georgia, and they’d be the Sec Champs. 

In the committee’s opinion, Michigan has the best current win over Ohio State. I don’t think they’ll lose to Iowa, but I also think it might not matter except for seeding. 
 

I think the committee is praying for Michigan to win, Louisville to win, and especially praying for Georgia to beat Bama to avoid some difficult explanations. 

if they cared about difficult explanations they'd already have Oregon behind Texas.  narrator: they don't give a fuck, the guy talked about Bo Nix, points scored, completion percentage, everything but Oregon's shitty SOS and nobody challenged him hard.  he didn't give a fuck.

[Nueces River Rat 5529]

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

Based on my reading of the CFP rankings, if Texas wins on Saturday, and Georgia, Michigan, Washington, Florida State, Oregon, and Ohio State all lose, then I think we’re in.

[Hank_Hill 18484]

6 minutes ago, UTEE97 said:

I feel like the committee is going by the average margin of victory to rank the one-loss teams. It's done in soccer and many other international sports. Can someone check into the average scoring differentials among Oregon, tOSU, Texas and Bama?

If so that’s fucking retarded when our SOS are literally 40 places apart 

[Huckleberry 32694]

Once again, never has a non-champion gone over a P5 champion with the same number of losses. All those times people remember non-champions getting in that is scaring them right now were when the champions they went instead of all had more losses.

[Hank_Hill 18484]

9 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Once again, never has a non-champion gone over a P5 champion with the same number of losses. All those times people remember non-champions getting in that is scaring them right now were when the champions they went instead of all had more losses.

Can’t wait for this to have to be posted again on the next page as people continue to ignore common sense

[bullet 1596]

34 minutes ago, MuellerHorn said:

My disagreement rests with the Oregon argument. I understand an undefeated UW is a 100% lock over Texas; but how is Oregon, as Pac-12 champion, not a lock over Texas? They've already been ranked ahead of Texas week after week and their title game win would be drastically better than Texas'.

I guess he argues that 1 in a million chance is better than 0 in a million.  Its kind of irrelevant.

[dcar00 14028]

3 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Once again, never has a non-champion gone over a P5 champion with the same number of losses. All those times people remember non-champions getting in that is scaring them right now were when the champions they went instead of all had more losses.

this is true.  I do think the are setting up a "chance" for Georgia this time because their adherence to the Oregon BS is just mystifying.

we never got close enough for it to matter but the whole time we were scheduling one tough or reasonably tough P5 I kept thinking "why do we do that?"

Texas has never won or had a chance to win a NC unless they were undefeated.  We always get screwed. and no one that is a blue blood ever gets punished for playing 3 D1 nobodies OOC.

Until they show they value SOS over number of losses we need to avoid any chance to take a loss OOC.  and that goes for when it goes to 12.  They will do the exact same poll era shit they've been doing for 25 years.  This year is the perfect example that proves the theory.

[millhouse 2587]

70 something seconds. None of this circle jerk and shit flinging happens if our defense gets a stop against OU in the final 70 something seconds.  Just win on Saturday and let the chips fall where they may